[rt-users] FastCGI vs/or FastCGId? System memory "leak"?

[Lengyel, Florian]

-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces at lists.bestpractical.com on behalf of Tomas Olaj
Sent: Mon 2/6/2006 3:55 AM
To: Justin Zygmont
Cc: rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] FastCGI vs/or FastCGId? System memory "leak"?
 
On the marvelous Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Justin Zygmont wrote kindly to me ...

>>> Jesse mentioned at the Amsterdam class that mod_FCGId is another 
>>> alternative (http://fastcgi.coremail.cn/) to mod_FastCGI, and I  will have 
>>> a closer look at this source. And, the source code looks  newer and 
>>> maintained. ;)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hello,
>> did anybody use fcgid successfully to replace fascgi? I would love an 
>> rt-specific configuration sample.
>> 
>> Regards,
>>     Harald
>
> I tried it, and it seemed to work great, until a few users noticed a place 
> where they could not create a ticket.  When I switched it back to cgi, or 
> fastcgi, it worked again.  So much for using that...
>
> Meanwhile, I can the fastcgi processes slowly taking up more and more ram.

I really haven't got time to test FCGId. Do You say that this software 
is not recommendable? Could there be other alternatives than FastCGI? 
FastCGI works, but it consumes memory, and I worry because no one 
maintains the source code.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Tomas A. P. Olaj, email: tomas.olaj at usit.uio.no, web: folk.uio.no/tomaso
  University of Oslo / USIT (Center for Information Technology Services)
    System- and Application Management / Applications Management Group
_______________________________________________
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

I gave up on FastCGI when I saw what was involved getting it to work
with apache2 under red Hat Enterprose linux. The endless HTML rubbish that
FastCGI will dump into the syslog when it throws an exception 
completely defeats the purpose of system logs with one line informative 
messages. The punishment for FastCGI's lack of consideration for my system
was a corresponding lack of consideration of it. I decided to use mod_perl. 
At first, the situation with Apache 2.2.0 and mod_perl2 weren't much better. 
The calls to the Apache  compatibility library begin with ap_null_handler, 
and descended from there to abysmal depths...Apparently, Apache 2.x jettisoned 
the apache compatibility library at some point (perhaps Apache 2.1). I would 
have had to revert to an earlier Apache 2. I ended up compiling mod_perl1 
version 1.26  with apache 1.13.34, since this combination seems to be 
the one recommended (ever so slightly more than FastCGI on the bestpractical site), 
and mod_perl1 seems to be considered more stable than mod_perl2. This choice
resulted in my first working system, though it could have been influenced by
"learning experiences" I had during the process. This was on a Debian sarge system.
I avoided apt-get and chose to compile the necessary software.

FL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bestpractical.com/pipermail/rt-users/attachments/20060206/81f18e1d/attachment.htm>